By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Cerebralbore101 on 29 March 2023
Edit Thread
Ryuu96 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

If European Commission were lied to then they would 100% mention it and call Microsoft up on it and would very unlikely drop their Console SLC concerns.

Source for the commission dropping their SLC concerns?

And how do you explain the fact that CMA knows Microsoft cancelled the PS5 version of Redfall but have dropped their Console SLC concerns and won't even require Microsoft to provide a contract for Call of Duty because they trust them on their word that they would still supply it to PlayStation...

They don't trust them on their word. They think that it's not financially feasible for MS to pull CoD from Playstation.

https://mp1st.com/news/microsoft-activision-deal-unlikely-to-hurt-console-gaming-market-admits-cma

Per the CMA - "While the arguments of Microsoft’s competitors in the console gaming market claimed that the Redmond company does have an incentive to engage in foreclosure strategies with Call of Duty, the CMA believes – after revising its predictive model based on input from all concerned parties – would lead to a net loss for all these parties in every scenario the regulator “found plausible.”

Obviously not, it would have been on PS5. What's your point?


My point is the European Commission concluded that MS/Zenimax wouldn't have an incentive to engage in an input foreclosure strategy. And yet MS/Zenimax did exactly that by ending the development of Starfield and Redfall for PS5.

And no, it's not a he said/she said. Anybody can look at the fact that they made an incorrect prediction concerning an input foreclosure strategy.

Source for the commission dropping their SLC concerns?

Microsoft's EU Remedies Target Only Cloud Streaming Rivals, Sources Says | Reuters

Others have reported on it, that Microsoft has only offered the European Commission aimed at Cloud, the logical reason for that would be that the European Commission has dropped their Console concerns because Microsoft would have zero reason not to offer them otherwise, they already have the contract written up for Sony.

They don't trust them on their word. They think that it's not financially feasible for MS to pull CoD from Playstation.

https://mp1st.com/news/microsoft-activision-deal-unlikely-to-hurt-console-gaming-market-admits-cma

Per the CMA - "While the arguments of Microsoft’s competitors in the console gaming market claimed that the Redmond company does have an incentive to engage in foreclosure strategies with Call of Duty, the CMA believes – after revising its predictive model based on input from all concerned parties – would lead to a net loss for all these parties in every scenario the regulator “found plausible.”

Just like the European Commission then who found that Microsoft doesn't have the financial incentive to make Zenimax titles exclusive.

Not having the financial incentive doesn't mean it is impossible. Once again, if Microsoft lied to the European Commission then it would be very easy for CMA to force a legally binding contract on them because they can't trust that Microsoft won't just eat the costs and go back on their word that they won't make Call of Duty exclusive.

And no, it's not a he said/she said. Anybody can look at the fact that they made an incorrect prediction concerning an input foreclosure strategy.

It is.

  • You're saying Microsoft lied to the European Commission.
  • The European Commission are saying they didn't.

Who do I believe? The regulator who was apparently lied to who spent months and dozens of hours talking to Microsoft or you who is interpreting a document in the way you want it to be...Once again, Microsoft told EC right from the start that future titles will be decided on a case-by-case basis. Most of the rest of the conversations were related to current support.

The European Commission aren't an agency who would accept being lied to without calling a company up on it, Lol.

Microsoft's EU Remedies Target Only Cloud Streaming Rivals, Sources Says | Reuters

So anonymous sources. Neat.

Microsoft told EC right from the start that future titles will be decided on a case-by-case basis.

The case by case basis claim is just a sad effort by MS to muddy the waters. It has zero bearing here.

In an interview with Kotaku Phil Spencer claimed all the way back in October of 2020 that MS didn't buy Zenimax in order to pull games from rivals. Then they proceeded to pull Zenimax games Starfield and Redfall from rivals. And even within that interview he was using the case by case basis gobbledygook to muddy the waters.

Edit for Source: https://kotaku.com/xbox-boss-phil-spencer-on-series-x-launch-halo-infinit-1845392984

Edit: Don't make me hunt down my pre-2021 comments on various articles where I take Spencer at his word and believe him on Starfield coming to PS5. I've no doubt you remember my comments from back then.

Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - on 29 March 2023